Share This article

Bear in mind that when this report says “unmanned systems” it means a whole lot more than just predator drones. In terms of unmanned systems, DoD prioritizes air first, maritime second, and ground last. In 2014, DoD expects about $4 billion will go to unmanned aerial systems, while maritime funding won’t exceed $350 million.

In terms of autonomy, the problems with communication make submerged vehicles a prime candidate — though shrinking the often enormous naval crews needed for modern American vessels would certainly please the budget obsession on display in this report. Ground automation will be largely ignored for several years, and won’t exceed $50 million in funding until 2017 — though much of the brunt work for an autonomous ground unit is being done by private industry.

Though BigDog will be a helpful load bearer, the robot will be far more useful when it can follow a unit without the need for any human attention.

The report makes only a few concrete predictions. From now to 2017, the department will focus on moving its compliment of unmanned systems from automated to autonomous. The distinction between an autopilot and a robot pilot is in the ability to make decisions, and that’s one of DoD’s biggest priorities.

Its predictions for 2020 and beyond are slightly more insightful, predicting “smart teams of unmanned systems operating autonomously to conduct operations in contested environments,” among other things. Then there is the idea of autonomous “loyal wingmen” to escort and assist manned elements. This could include autonomous quadcopters to scout ahead of a unit or even hunt targets through indoor areas. From a tireless BigDog pack mule to a literal robot wingman, the DoD wants to make robots the American soldier’s best friend.

In terms of current capabilities, if DoD is conducting any meaningful field tests of truly autonomous vehicles, it’s not talking about it — and since software can be discreetly switched on and off without alerting any outside forces, the department certainly has no reason to start. Automated defense systems have only the most limited ability to act without permission, and then only when the need to act quickly (say, if a supersonic missile is headed for American shores) is extreme.

Everyone from search and rescue teams to Kickstarter entrepreneurs is working on autonomous quadcopter software, but their work likely pales to what DARPA (the military’s moonshot division) has behind closed doors. Though details are scarce, we do know that agency is hard at work making pilots, drivers, and helmsmen obsolete, having just completed its Grand Challenge in robot AI. Very little such work has seen the light of day, but that’s precisely what DoD wants to change over the coming 3-5 years.

DARPA’s Transformer X concept, currently under development, sees autonomy applied to a troop transport that can both fly and drive.

Potential challenges to this future are many, and are more than just technological. The United Nations recently advised the world that autonomous war machines are a de-facto threat to humanity, and should be banned. Additionally, while responsibility for a single case of human error, negligence, or malevolence ultimately falls on the soldier alone, a computational error that leads to a number of dead civilians could cast doubt on every unit under control that software. And, frankly, the algorithms of today simply cannot measure up to the flexibility of a human actor — and while it might seem short-sighted to say so, we should consider the possibility that they perhaps never will. At the very least, our justified squeamishness about killer robots could restrict specifically those robot freedoms that would allow autonomy to truly come into its own.

As this report points out, we are at a turning point in the development of autonomous systems. What we have today are highly sophisticated automatic functions that are closely monitored and directed by human beings. Over the next three to four years, DoD plans to redirect a significant portion of its R&D efforts toward phasing out most of those humans, and reducing the role of those that remain. When the first autonomous robots begin publicly taking to the field for test runs, that will be an interesting time indeed for international politics, and yet another (inevitably failed) test of the United Nations’ ability to control its most powerful member states.

So, does austerity breed autonomy? That is certainly the DoD’s view, as seen in this report. It mentions the pinch of the sequester and its roughly $500 billion budget more than 60 times in 168 pages, and autonomy is mostly framed in terms of maintaining operational ability in the face of cutbacks, rather than expanding those abilities outright. Still, the budget constraints don’t seem to warrant this much long-term panic, especially since the sequester is (hypothetically) a temporary concern. We must ensure that the quest to hit a budget, or improve efficiency, or even keep American soldiers out of harm’s way, doesn’t make the US military rush heedless into a moral and political quagmire with no end in sight.

Tagged In

Post a Comment

Heath Parsons

DoD makes no sense. If offense were the game plan, it would be DoO… but it’s not, it’s defense, and there is plenty of manpower here at home for that.

If the goal is to save budget (like they had any to begin with), and it can only be purposeful to equip robots with weapons, we should probably think about leaving other countries…This is just another excuse to stay in war.

Jesse Gomez

I don’t know why you are being voted down, but I agree with you completely.

Daniel Revas

He’s being voted down by people who understand that a “forward defense” is better than waiting until the Wolves are LITERALLY at your door.

Jesse Gomez

So what you are saying is that it’s ok to attack people if you think they are a threat to you? That’s so nice.

Daniel Revas

Nice? What are you, 12? I’m a Veteran, my oldest fought in Iraq. We actually know something about warfare, and no, it’s not “nice.”
It is a simple concept, you want to engage your enemies where they live, not where you live.
Now, in whatever Fantasy Land you live in, if you would prefer to get killed, have your home destroyed, and have everyone who means anything to you go up in smoke, well…good for you. I guess that makes you “nice”, though I think it makes you something else that I’m not going to say in an attempt to also be “nice.”
So yes, those of us who live in the real world would rather do the fighting elsewhere rather than being “nice.” We would, as Patton once said, “…win the War by making the other poor, dumb, Bastard die for his Country.”
If you don’t have the stones for that, leave to people who do.

Pepe

Why did you get your enemies thousands and thousands of miles away and most of the rest of the world doesn’t?, A.- because you has a pretty face and the rest of the world does?, B.- because your country intervenes to F much in other places?. And please, please lets just jump the democracy, liberty, etc. thing (not that there is anything wrong with those words)

Daniel Revas

Is there a point in there?

TeeHeeHee

Moron-speak. I don’t know of any war since WWII where the enemy could even theoretically “engage” us in US territory. If thats the basis for war then we can close up 90% of our military bases because no country has such interest or capability except one or two countries in the entire world. The constant imagined threat of war is nothing more than chronic inflammation, which we all know leads to cancer, disease, and early death. That is what you are really promoting for your country with such moron-speak.

Daniel Revas

So you don’t think the “enemy” knocked down the World Trade Center? Struck the Pentagon, bombed the Boston Marathon, and put a Van Full of explosives in Times Square?
That is moronic. You can’t seem to grasp the concept that “enemies” don’t necessarily fly national flags.

LarchOye

The most important thing to have in war, is an enemy.

Letting other people make enemies for you, is in fact the most tragic flaw of mankind (thus far).

Once dubbed “the enemy”, all reference to logic, rationale, or any classification OTHER than “enemy” status- is scuffed as absolutely preposterous.

What is TRULY PREPOSTEROUS however, is any inclining that this behavior is correct, or intelligent in any way.

I have no enemies. You cannot make them for me, and I will not assume that any of yours are mine mutually.

All of those who do, NEED TO FUCKING REPEAT KINDERGARDEN UNTIL THIS SHIT MAKES SENSE.

Daniel Revas

So when do they become your enemy? When you’re in the building that they blow up?

Scott Patterson

We are the wolves……

Daniel Revas

You mean the “Wolves” that knocked down the World Trade Center, attacked the Pentagon, bombed the Boston Marathon, or that left a Van full of explosives in Times Square? Those “Wolves”? They are from many different places, and so are the people who sent them.

TeeHeeHee

The fact a $1Trillion dollar defense industry cannot apparently prevent such attacks is evidence that continued funding at those levels is unnecessary as it does not increase security or that those attacks were orchestrated to justify continued funding for the defense industry. Have your pick

Daniel Revas

The fact that it has prevented many more and conducts the promising research referenced in this article would beg to differ. Not to mention it has stayed the hands of both the Russians and the Chinese.

Taiwan, among others, thank you.

TeeHeeHee

Sounds like you’re pushing pre-emptive war and colonization, one’s illegal under international law and the other is nothing more than thinly veiled occupation.

Daniel Revas

Pre-emptive military strikes are not always illegal under international law. Pre-emptive strikes are allowed where imminent danger exists.
You are also wrong on the second count. I’ll strike that up to Cognitive Dissonance, because I am expressly against “nation building”, which as a chief component involves occupation. So I am interested in colonization or simple occupation not at all. Quite on the contrary. I relish a world in which we can strike our enemies without one American Combat Boot setting foot on foreign soil.

In our family we have done it more than once. I would prefer that no one in my family has to do it again.

havor

I agree and the title should have bin:

DoD: To conquer nations and budgets, combat must go totally autonomous, so the American people can even care less what hapens far far away.

Bryson
. even though
Emily
`s artlclee
is cool…
on friday I got
a great
Bugatti Veyron
from having earned
$7131
this month
and-over,
ten thousand
this past munth
. it’s definitly
the most-financially rewarding
Ive had
. I actually started
nine months/ago
and straight away
startad making
at least
$76…
p/h
. check out this site B­u­z­ℤ­3­4­.­ℂ­o­ℳ

thx1138v2

Study Sun Tsu’s The Art of War. The best war is the one you win without fighting. The best defence is a good offense and if it is obviously superior in overwhelming force the opponent will not provoke the fight to begin with because they can see the defeat before the beginning of the hostilities. It’s known as peace through strength.

AdamRadzik22

Thank you. I hate the thought of having even LESS human interaction involved in war, and I hate how much modern warfare already removes it. As Jason Dean says below, war is serious business, and putting even more distance between KILLING another human is scary.

With all of that said though, you’re 100% right.

thx1138v2

Yep, the world is a scary place. War has always been about technology and the purpose of that technology has always been about putting distance between the combatants. Throwing rocks evolved into throwing pointed rocks on sticks – spears. Spears evolved into arrows which evolved into muskets which evolved into high powered rifles with a twist in the barrel to stabilized the projectile and make them more accurate. Then along came submarines and airplanes and then missiles and rockets. It’s all about inflicting as much damage as possible with the least exposure and technology is what produces that advantage. The technology genie can’t be put back in the bottle except in one way. Some say that wars after a nuclear war will be fought with sticks and stones.
Remember MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction)? That’s what has prevented nuclear weapons from being used so far and that is peace through strength.

havor

Your argument is solid, but also very scary.

As the US imho is now a country without a real democratic political system, a totally polarized news system, and is run by the one percenters.

If the US gets real autonomous firepower, i fear for the world, and also more 9/11 like attacks, as thats the only poor mans weapon.

TeeHeeHee

9/11 attacks are what are used to pacify populations into accepting undemocratic police state societies. Operation Gladio redux.

Naipier

It’s important to note that Sun Tsu was not just referring to superior firepower… but also propaganda, and diplomacy. Peace can never happen through sheer firepower alone.

thx1138v2

That’s true once the fighting has started but sheer, brute, overwhelming superior force can prevent the fight starting in the first place.

TeeHeeHee

He was not referring to superior firepower at all. No direct engagement. Peace can never happen through sheer firepower period. BTW, “peace” by killing everyone who might potentially oppose you isn’t peace, its genocide.

Daniel Revas

You have no concept of what actual genocide is if you really believe that. Visit the surviving Nazi Concentration Camps, then you will understand genocide. Or visit the areas of the Balkans where the largest mass graves were unearthed, then you’ll understand genocide. Because you obviously don’t. Genocide is inflicted on the helpless. Our enemies are not helpless.

Oh, and the goal is never to kill “all” of your enemies, it’s just to kill enough of them.

Pull your head out of Ron or Rand Paul’s Ass for a minute and take a fresh look around. You might learn something.

tachyonzero

Well tell that to the countries before WWII, Soviet Union, Poland, etc.
Peace brought all so called inferior people to the Crematorium

Heath Parsons

Sun Tsu’s works are great. I’ve read them, and while I don’t agree with everything that was written, war is a horrible thing but cheating must be done if you are to win.

TeeHeeHee

You failed at reading that book. He wasn’t referring to armed combat or “overwhelming force” at all, but asymmetrical warfare. The entire point was how to overpower a superior force, without any engagement.

Dustymack

You know that 30% of our spending is on our DOD budget. These guys are swimming in money. Not to mention that most of these drowns will be made by China in the near future and manned/maintained by Mexicans.

Daniel Revas

“Swimming in money”? Do you have any idea how much that spending supports local economies or the Civilian jobs it creates? The spinoff Tech that is developed that we all enjoy, like Plasma Panels?

It isn’t like the DoD says “We have all this money to buy shiny things …” Yes Precious…Shiny Things…”

We are a Superpower, we are a nation of significant land mass, we have to have the best Military possible, and that’s expensive. Millions, if not Billions go to University Grants, to private sector research Labs, and of course, to Defense Contractors. It is necessary.

Then there are the people. The most vulnerable and expensive component. Having served myself, and having my Son come back from Iraq as, in too many ways, a Shadow of his former self, then damn straight I’m for removing our people as far from the meat grinder as possible. If we save money doing it, then that’s just cake.

TeeHeeHee

Exactly. If unmanned drones are the future then the countries with the largest manufacturing resources will crowd the board. Besides theres no point or potential in world wars anyway. Just one or two nuclear plants go and it will effectively cripple a country and risk contaminating the hemisphere. MAD is not nuclear weapons but nuclear power, and as such the only countries where war is likely are the ones without nuclear power.

Heath Parsons

DoD makes no sense. If offense were the game plan, it would be DoO… but it’s not, it’s defense, and there is plenty of manpower here at home for that.

If the goal is to save budget (like they had any to begin with), and it can only be purposeful to equip robots with weapons, we should probably think about leaving other countries…This is just another excuse to stay in war.

jason dean

in short, the dod wants skynet to happen. Yeah, we know how that ended up, no ?

for a real eye opener, one may want to look up the phenomena of intermittent accidental self-automation in drones, even at this stage.

there is a reason that there should always be a human-to-human element in war- because war is SUPPOSED to be Serious F**king Business (for everyone involved), not some cybernetic half-virtual reality game with machine-on-human slaughtering.

meddle0ne

I don’t make my decisions based on fictional movies.

havor

Actually its still fictional for now, but all AI experts say they will have AI working within 50 years.

Now just hope that that AI is smarter the humans, and not gone be as self interested and greedy as it inventors.

jqpabc123

… but all AI experts say they will have AI working within 50 years.

That’s what they said 50 years ago.

The modern computer is a logic playback device —- if you (or someone) can think it and code it into binary logic, the computer can repeat the logic over and over again at high speed. Quite useful to be sure — but still dumb as a rock.

The first step toward real “AI” is to completely re-think and re-design the architecture of the computer as we know it.

TeeHeeHee

What makes you think they don’t have it now? Because they said come back in 50 years?

Stacey Bright

Its funny that A) I knew someone would relate this to Skynet. B) Some one else would disregard it due to it being fiction. While I’m a bit on the fence with the concept, keep in mind a lot of scientific accomplishments that have been made were very much originally ideas that were just science fiction. Its seems that at some point these fictional ideas became plausible, and then a reality. There is not a single man made object that anyone can expect to work with absolute perfection. Everything has a failure rate which is simply deemed ‘acceptable’. Fiction or not, its is certainly not implausible. Computers as we know them are basically very dumb. They do what we tell them to do, right or wrong. If at any point we manage to create a computer capable of its own decision making and learning, what makes you believe the human element involved in the chain will get it absolutely right without error. Heck it would probably be scarier for it to actually be perfect, as the one thing that always comes in to play in these fictional robotic doomsday scenarios is the obvious and real imperfection of man.

Justin

I think the next big threat is cyber warfare. Making a bunch of remotely controlled killing machines is great if you are in control.

http://reversi.ng/ Cai

Am I the only one who saw a logo of “The Pirate Bay” on the drone?

Giorgio Jørgensen

if u have a 3d printer you can download and print stuff from there already, even guns….so yes it will come :-D

XenoSilvano

lol, imagine that, 3D printing combat grade UAVs.

anders bjørnø

You laugh now but as we speak, the US and Israel are using your idea.

thx1138v2

Butlerian jihad?

Dozerman

Right, let’s just outlaw machines newer than 270 years. I’m sure the Amish will be thrilled! :)

Dozerman

This is a terrible idea.

For a second here, let’s set aside our opinions on WHY we’re fighting a war. Regardless of reasons, when you occupy a country, hearts and minds will win long before bullets and bombs. Imagine the current context with a counterinsurgency where the enemy is also the village handyman. How does a robot explain to the locals that the person who they just killed was a confirmed insurgent? Sure, you can play a recording from a microphone, but human psychology doesn’t really deal well with faceless speaker systems. Compliance is key, and people don’t really like to comply with machines.

When you’re out, walking among the population, you make friends and build extremely important ties with the locals. This can make or break a war. You get tipped off in very subtle ways when you’re talking one on one with people. Robots can’t do that. All they do is make the locals want to revolt. Think about it; who would you rather be occupied by?

Michael Scoffield

No it isn’t. Have you seen what the American soldiers did in Iraq and Afghanistan. There are recordings of them going around killing whomever they wanted, even a father with a minibus full of children. They raped countless women. A robot will never kill someone just for fun or rape a woman as most soldiers do.

Dozerman

I really should ignore you; I don’t come to ET for political discussions. Unfortunately, I can’t let someone just go around blatantly lying without addressing them.

You should probably check your sources, maybe watch something other than al jazeera. American rapes and assaults in the military are a tiny blip on the radar compared to the hundreds of thousands of others out there who are deploying, doing their job, and coming home without malice done, lower in percentages than in most first world countries. Those few are people you just can’t stop. Every other military has people who can’t take pressure, and many but the most civilized countries operate their militaries off of these behaviors.

You seem to also be under the impression that drones are incapable of causing collateral damage or hitting the wrong target. You think it’s bad when an American soldier shoots a van full of kids because he’s under the impression that it’s full of insurgents? Just wait until some twelve line block of code out of hundreds of billions that some contractor forgot to comment out gets executed and every warm body within a two mile radius becomes a hostile enemy.

Naipier

I was with you until you said: “maybe watch something other than al Jazeera”. Who would you suggest? Fox News? CNN? I suppose you’re against the BBC too. Can’t accept good solid journalism that isn’t tainted by the heavy handed greed that runs American media, I see. Or perhaps you’d simply prefer to turn a blind eye. Calling the rapes and assaults by our service members a “tiny blip” when “compared too” is appalling. That you would even attempt to defend rape and assault is extremely offensive. Rape and assault should NOT be happening at all, full stop! People in other nations wont remember the help we proffered… they will remember those bastards who come to their home, raped and beat their neighbors.

Dozerman

1. When did I ever attempt to defend rape and assault? I said that it happens and is a part of life that happens everywhere in the world. That fact is undeniable and the bastards who did that deserve what they got: life in prison and death, depending on the case. I said “compared to” because, although it does happen, clearly all of these mind numbingly boring sexual assault briefings and trial videos of people being sentenced to death that I’ve had to sit through actually got to someone and that the rates are lower than what happens in the cities of countries at peace.

2. I don’t care what you watch or read for news as long as you (or the person I was replying to) don’t go around spreading blatant lies. I never said I had a problem specifically with any of the listed sources, although certain programs are obviously skewed to one side or the other. Actually, it seems that you are defending Al Jazeera, implying that they are “good, solid journalism”. Either that or the BBC, which is just as skewed as CNN and the such. Kind of hard to see through your blind, raging moraltrip.

3. That last sentence; What? They were so much better off when it was the Taliban and Sadam regimes breaking in, raping and killing while they severed the body parts from the living in front of their families for not following the Muslim traditions to a “T”. No, they’ve seen the positive changes, and only those who were in power before because of the preexisting regimes and the most religious types are who only see the negative without the positive of America’s presence.

Finally, a bit of advice:
Take a step back, breathe, and consider that what you’ve been told to believe isn’t true. It did me a great deal of good when I did.

Naipier

1. Are you serious? Your entire second paragraph attempts to dismiss and minimalize rape and assault by service members. That is, in effect, defending it. You speak of it as if we should just turn our heads away cause in your words its just “a tiny blip on the radar”. Perhaps you didn’t intend to relay quite that message… but that is how it came across. I’ll say it again for emphasis: Rape and assault should NOT be happening at all, full stop.

2. Clearly you do care what news sources others partake since one of the first things you said was “You should probably check your sources, maybe watch something other than al jazeera”. And then later associated them with “blatant lies”. So, in effect, you claim to be the authority on the matter though you failed to cite your sources… which is suspicious at best. You think Al Jazeera has questionable journalistic integrity? Then name a better news source. So far Al Jazeera and the BBC have been better at reporting events that matter than mainstream sources in the US.

3. I’m not going to argue with you about the merits of warfare. I will say that our (US based) media has frequently failed to report important facts about what is really going on. Here are some of the facts: We were lied into these wars. We are in debt because of these wars. We have more enemies abroad because of these wars. Hundreds of thousands have lost their lives unnecessarily in these wars… some of them, my brothers in arms. The mainstream news consistently failed to provide these details until other “non mainstream” sources relayed them… and even then, it took quite some time for those details to reach the light of day state-side. The news sources you’ve bemoaned have been more honest, and more transparent, to the US public than any other news network.

Lastly: I offer you this counter advice: Don’t call into question someone’s sources without being prepared to defend your own.

Michael Scoffield

To address you comment. First of all, I don’t even get Al Jazeera here in Europe, I don’t know why would you automatically assume I do just because I criticize the US Army. You seem to fail to understand is that all military are despicable people. The very fact they do their job makes them like this. IT IS THE NATURE OF THEIR JOBS. They go to a distant land with the sole purpose of killing other people, that why war exists. And these killing and raping incidents are not just a tiny blip but a very common thing. Please take a look at this when they execute a Reuters crew: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LF9P5vIzYyE
According to Wikileaks here are thousands of documented cases and ten times more undocumented of such things.

You have to understand that this is natural. If you look at history, every time a nation invades another one there always killing and raping. It what war is, horror of the highest level, blood, shit and guts. Don’t get me wrong, the Muslims had it coming but don’t try to make it sound like American soldiers are heroes. They the scum of the American people, they’re licensed killers that work for the profit of your government. Hell, even one of my distant ancestors, who was member of the Order of the Dragon, once shadowed the sun with the number of impaled Muslim corpses that were his victims. He was a killer, and so are your American soldiers. There’s nothing great about them doing their job. That’s reality.

Weather right to wage war with Afghanistan and Iraq or not it doesn’t matter. War is war and soldiers will always soldiers. People send to a foreign land to kill other people, inflict as much damage and leave or enslave them.

Drones would be more effective. They’re harder to take down, they’re much better at killing and are only programmed to kill insurgents. They never feel the urge to rape civilians, never kill without being sure. Drones never kill out of blind fear like so many soldiers do. Weather you want to accept it or not this is the future of war. In a few decades AI’s will be superior killing machines to any human force and in my view, more just, only engaging combatants.

Daniel Revas

America Hating is a Euro Sport. Why didn’t you just say you were European in the first place. We could have saved valuable time by discounting your twisted view of the U.S. Military at the outset.

Michael Scoffield

Actually I don’t hate America, I love it. I feel more at home in America than in Europe. I hate all military weather, Europeans, Americans or Chinese, the military and the cops are mostly scum. It is indeed fashionable to bash Americans here in Europe, but I never do it. I bash your government, your military, your cops but never you, the people.

Dozerman

First of all let me back up, I am a heavy equipment operator in the united states air force. I’ve seen what most have only read about first hand. There’s a reason that I’m taking what you are saying personally; you have directed it at me, personally, not just some group somewhere that I admire or support, but a group that I am a part of and takes up a huge slice of my life. I have never been sent over to kill people, only to build. I know the ones who’s job it is to kill, though, and they aren’t the type of people you think they are. Their job is a defensive one, not offensive. They aren’t even allowed to shoot back unless they have first been shot at, the same as me.

I never actually meant that you watch Al Jazeera. I was being sarcastic. Maybe I shouldn’t have said that, maybe I should. It doesn’t matter. Regardless, wikileaks isn’t much better. The problem is that, as it’s name implies, it’s a wiki. Everything that is said there has to be taken at the word of the person who posted it. On top of that, It’s incredibly easy to create fake government documents that are indistinguishable from the real thing. I know this because I’ve done this before as a joke and managed to get a guy to sign on it how many times a week he shits and how often he has sex. Don’t fool yourself into thinking that there aren’t people out there who have the motivation to create false documents. Like another poster said, America hating is a bit of a sport in too many places.

Michael Scoffield

Okay, I might have come on a little strong. First I want to say that I have no desire to mock America or it’s armed forces. I’m even in love with an American girl. I don’t despise just the American military but all the military of the world. Soldiers exist to kill and they’re nothing heroic about they’re line of work.

Your reaction is natural. I’ve verbally attacked the institution you work at. Even if the work you do does not involve violence, the overall goal of the Gulf wars was violence, destruction leading to occupation. Defensive would be to defend your country on it’s shores, not thousands of miles away among a foreign people.

I acknowledge that Wikileaks may not be 100% accurate but thousands of reports cannot be faked. The video I liked to does not lie. The soldiers of most modern armies are nothing more than government paid mercenaries. They are there to serve the interests of the groups and corporations that control the government. I’ve also seen what war can do to people and to me it seems the worst kind of horror. It’s humanity at it’s lowest are murder has no moral justification.

I’m sorry if I came off as an American hater. I’m not that. Actually I’ve even been mocked by my fellow Europeans for refusing to hate on the American people. I have no problem hating some of the things that you government does, but I’m never hating the people. My strong words come from my unfortunate past experiences with war and violence, experiences that rendered me disdainful towards all kind of military action. Maybe that’s why I think that removing the human element from war, would make it much less cruel.

Dozerman

Well, I appreciate your civility in this. I suppose now is the time to leave this conversation at an odd place for internet arguments and agree to disagree.

Michael Scoffield

Yes, lets respectfully agree to disagree and write a new chapter in the history of internet civility. We might have diverging opinions but nevertheless, as a fellow human being, I wish you all the best in all your endeavors and I look forward to more fruitful discussions with you on this website. After all, it’s wonderful that we can exchange opinions and so much knowledge in this place. All the best !

Dozerman

Ditto.

Ivor O’Connor

Problem is these drones are still controlled by our politicians just as our young would be. Politicians by their very nature are egomaniacal psychopaths that pray upon the idealistic young who were not given wisdom by their parents.

Ivor O’Connor

I always wondered why Al Jazeera sounded so Americanized. It came out a few years ago they are controlled by our CIA.

If you want real news, not another American channel, go to rt.com. I watch them and it gives a totally different perspective.

Glenn Scott

“A robot will never kill someone just for fun or rape a woman as most soldiers do”

Wow. Simply, wow.

da

No, thanks. You can keep the rapists and murderers of the US armed forces out of my country.

Dozerman

Hey, michael. I see that you created another account just to downvote me. Wish I had that kind of fanatical drive in my life. I can only imagine what I could accomplish.

Michael Scoffield

Nah man, I’m too lazy to create multiple accounts. Actually, I was even too lazy to reply to you in a timely fashion. I don’t apply my fanatical drive to online arguments.

Dozerman

I’m still curious who created a new account just to downvote me and wriite two sentences.

Ivor O’Connor

Your children? ;)

This is how our kids figure out what we are up to.

Daniel Revas

Hearts and Minds? Yeah, that worked out real well in Vietnam.

Dozerman

We weren’t occupying vietnam, we were defending the south. The big issues with the American/Vietnamese relations was a breakdown of American discipline among the ranks. That was a lesson we learned the hard way. Discipline discipline discipline.

Daniel Revas

No, the problem in Vietnam was first and foremost that we were supporting a corrupt Regime that the average Citizen of South Vietnam saw as little better than the leaders in the North, this after it became Public knowledge that we had participated in the Assassination of Diem. How’s that for starters? We Fu-bared so many ways in Vietnam I could write a book, but there have already been plenty written. The fact is “Hearts and Minds” never worked.
Hmmm, a lot of Iraqi’s saw it the same way. Fallujah fell to Al Qaeda today. My Son fought in the Battle to liberate that City in 2004. Ramadi appears to be next. That’s where my Son was wounded, trying to keep a little peace, where he manned a MG on top of a Polling place so local Iraqi citizens could vote, for most it was the first time in their lives. He bled and many of his fellow Soldiers died for what?
Now it has all gone to shit. Kill our enemies from as far away as possible and get out of the Nation Building business?
Hell yes.

XenoSilvano

The fiascos that have occur since the beginning of this century should be a big enough wakeup call for us all as to what our collective future is going to be like.

It should be obvious to everyone by now that these people intend on subjugating us all and subduing anyone who dares challenge the authority of the empire.

XenoSilvano

And any of you people out there that serve governmental institutions with the mindset that ‘it is better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven’ are a bunch of sick #####.

Singh1699

If you’re a part of the military, you don’t need to worry about what it does. And the Sikh nation is rising again, so don’t worry it’ll tear America apart.

If you doubt that, see how Britain lost, and before that the 2nd largest Muslim empire sent 1 million soldiers to catch 48, and hehehe…

Vaheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Ji Ki Fateh||

Michael Scoffield

Again with the pussy Sikh. American drones will smoke’em from a distance. They might be the most bad ass people in the world if they’re technologically inferior, they’ll lose. Technology wins and loses wars, not people.

Daniel Revas

“When the first autonomous robots begin publicly taking to the field for test runs, that will be an interesting time indeed for international politics, and yet another (inevitably failed) test of the United Nations’ ability to control its most powerful member states.”

The idea of the U.N. was never to “control” their Member States. It was designed as a forum where all Member Nations could negotiate their differences. The U.N. lost sight of this long ago. Their attempts to “exert control” is what have help fuel resistance to their initiatives. That is why they fail, and why yes, they will fail in this arena as well.

Mauryan

I prefer wars to be between armies of robots from both sides. People can watch the war and rate it. Better yet, one country can fight a war using XBox and the other with PS4. All war will be virtual and whoever wins, gets what they demand. Soldiers shot down can come back live not more than three times.

I appreciate all the opinions of vets that have chimed in here. My
husband is a Navy Vet and currently works for the DoD. I’m admittedly a
little disappointed about not seeing more comments discussing what
would be my own immediate concerns about such a horrifying
prospect…fully automated warfare.

As another commenter said,
“you don’t want MORE space between “combatants” in warfare.” War is a
horrible thing and should REMAIN that way. It should NOT resemble a
video game. DARPA was the organization responsible for creating first
person shooter games in the first place because the consciences of
soldiers was making it difficult for them to pull triggers when you have
to look at the guy you are supposed to shoot. A guy who, like you,
probably has a wife and children at home.

But undoubtedly the MOST disturbing thing about further dehumanizing warfare is the inability for machines to make moral decisions or to REJECT UNLAWFUL
ORDERS. This is a CRITICAL element that prevents warfare from becoming
WAR CRIMES, and as it currently stands, war crimes still happen.
Conscience plays an important role in keeping war from becoming an
automated genocide.

The frightening prospects of what the DoD ultimately wants, are too many to ponder. We are seeing our NATURAL RIGHTS that are Constitutionally guaranteed, evaporate under an environment of “constant threat.” Those rights are clearly not
respected by the “Nanny/Police State” that “knows whats best” for us,
and since they can’t be trusted to not abuse their power (as they do it
ALL the time) who is to say they can be trusted not to turn an automated
warfare apparatus in on their own citizens? It’s happened MANY times
before in history.

Do you know that they have incorporated the Blue Force Situational Awareness (BFSA) system as part of the “National Continuity Program?” That’s a technology used on the battlefield to identify “friendlies and non-friendlies” to reduce “friendly fire” incidents. What the hell do they need that here at home for and why
have they declared the USA a “battlefield?” My husband and I bought
this “story” to AJ’s attention in this article (actually, I called in
and brought it up) I’d recommend READING the solicitation document in this article: http://w w w.infowars.com/military-to-designate-u-s-citizens-as-enemy-during-collapse/

Sorry folks, allowing the DoD to have this kind of power is a disaster
waiting to happen and we’d be smart to stop it now before it progresses
any further. Ordinary citizens wouldn’t stand a chance against this
type of technology. They already plan to have 30,000 drones overhead
here at home in the coming years. There is NO privacy anymore. Let’s
also not forget that they took the GPS coordinates of EVERY front door
in this country during the last census. You don’t need to be a rocket
scientist to put two and two together and realize that the “domestic
threat” is MUCH more worthy of concern and attention than ANY foreign
threat is.

Lets ponder ALL the possibilities before we come to regret doing something this HUGE that cannot be undone. This isSERIOUS business we are talking about here. Sticking our heads in the sand and avoiding the “impolite” concerns will only serve to harm us in the long run. I want this country to be a safe place for my children to
live. A “fully autonomous” military would NOT foster a safe environment for my children OR YOURS!

Daniel Revas

I thank your husband for his service, but while I have a Son who also served in the Navy, my oldest Son was a Battalion Scout on the ground in the Army in Iraq. He fought in the Battle of Fallujah and then got to spend the rest of his tour in a lovely little garden spot called Ramadi. He will carry the physical and mental scars of that experience for the rest of his life. (80% disability that still may go up to 90%.) So anything that removes brave young Men and Women from the Meat-Grinder of Modern Warfare is a GOOD thing in my view

Oh, it makes an interesting argument in the safety of your living room to ruminate on the implication of the technology being discussed here, a wonderful intellectual exercise as it were, but when you hear the stories from people like my Son, stories that make the tales from the Vietnam Vets that mentored me as a young Soldier seem pale by comparison in many ways, I am unmoved by your position.

When I hear my Son talking about an IED at a checkpoint he was manning destroying a 7-Ton Iraqi Army truck loaded with Iraqi soldiers, and he and his fellow soldiers having to scoop up the remains with shovels and load them into plastic bags? You will have to forgive me if I would prefer if an autonomous Android Soldier had been there to do the honors.

When he talks about the day he earned his Purple Heart along with a citation for bravery, when he saw a fellow Soldier blown into myriad pieces by an IED buried in a spot my Son and his Platoon Leader had vacated only moments before, a story he relates with crushing survivors guilt? Yes, give me an autonomous Android that won’t find itself with PTSD that is so bad that it is routinely holding onto its self control by its fingernails. If it had fingernails. Because that’s how my Son lives.

I respect your argument, but it is based almost wholly on “what if’s?” What happens to our Men and Women on the Battlefield is a brutal reality.
And since less then one-tenth of one percent of Americans actually serve, while most Americans can’t or won’t, what else do those who do serve have to sacrifice? Why should they not benefit from ANY technology that will help them from ending up dead, or hopelessly shattered? This is something that you should understand.

My family has been serving since an ancestor on my Mothers side donned the Union Blue. Many, many families have Service that goes back earlier than that. When I look into the eyes of my 9 year old Grandson, whose soon to be Step Dad is also a wounded Vet, I hope that he NEVER has to fire a shot in anger, and I’m for any technology that can help make that a reality.

I’m not making light of your concerns. I just happen to think that in a reversal of the history of Military technology which has been overwhelmingly developed in an effort to be more lethal, we should embrace any technology that fundamentally changes the paradigm for the safety of our Warriors. There is always risk with new technology, but time after time those risks have been met with great rewards.

I can think of none greater than protecting those who protect the rest of us.

Mirimon

I’ve been saying similar for years… wars would less likely be fought if we all went back to using only swords….to include those who would make the decisions of war itself… only those of us who have been seen and done truly understand. (economically, it would also be less of a toll, as most people tend to only see the immediate, direct costs of a war in terms of how much a plane cost.. the cost all around goes on for hundreds of years of effects… for just a single battle..

Sam Cerulean

One step closer to Skynet and the New World Order

http://www.kizi1.org/ Kizi 1

aircraft reconnaissance drone which was a development of outstanding military and I do not fully understand its power

LarchOye

Please remove the term “Defense Industry” from your vernacular, and replace it with “War and Aggression Industry” or something that actually isn’t a complete oxyfucktard.

Thomas_Blaney

Like taking the man out of manslaughter.

Mirimon

it’s funny, because atm in order to remotely pilot all those UAV’s and such, the pilots are mandated to pass a flight physical………… you know how many disabled and/or obese/other people not able to pass a flight physical would smoke any current UAV system pilot out there?.. soo much for fighting smarter, not harder…..

robthom

““take the ‘man’ out of unmanned” combat.”

And you can bet your sweet bippy that they’ll be taking the “man” out of the police state after that.

Use of this site is governed by our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Copyright 1996-2015 Ziff Davis, LLC.PCMag Digital Group All Rights Reserved. ExtremeTech is a registered trademark of Ziff Davis, LLC. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission of Ziff Davis, LLC. is prohibited.